You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
An Electrocorticographic Brain Interface in an Individual with Tetraplegia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, February 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0055344 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wei Wang, Jennifer L. Collinger, Alan D. Degenhart, Elizabeth C. Tyler-Kabara, Andrew B. Schwartz, Daniel W. Moran, Douglas J. Weber, Brian Wodlinger, Ramana K. Vinjamuri, Robin C. Ashmore, John W. Kelly, Michael L. Boninger |
| Abstract |
Brain-computer interface (BCI) technology aims to help individuals with disability to control assistive devices and reanimate paralyzed limbs. Our study investigated the feasibility of an electrocorticography (ECoG)-based BCI system in an individual with tetraplegia caused by C4 level spinal cord injury. ECoG signals were recorded with a high-density 32-electrode grid over the hand and arm area of the left sensorimotor cortex. The participant was able to voluntarily activate his sensorimotor cortex using attempted movements, with distinct cortical activity patterns for different segments of the upper limb. Using only brain activity, the participant achieved robust control of 3D cursor movement. The ECoG grid was explanted 28 days post-implantation with no adverse effect. This study demonstrates that ECoG signals recorded from the sensorimotor cortex can be used for real-time device control in paralyzed individuals. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 29 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 9 | 31% |
| United Kingdom | 4 | 14% |
| Costa Rica | 1 | 3% |
| Mexico | 1 | 3% |
| Canada | 1 | 3% |
| Brazil | 1 | 3% |
| Japan | 1 | 3% |
| Singapore | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 10 | 34% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 23 | 79% |
| Scientists | 3 | 10% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 402 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 12 | 3% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | <1% |
| Germany | 2 | <1% |
| Italy | 2 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Malaysia | 1 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| Hungary | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 379 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 109 | 27% |
| Researcher | 66 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 48 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 44 | 11% |
| Professor | 19 | 5% |
| Other | 60 | 15% |
| Unknown | 56 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 122 | 30% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 50 | 12% |
| Neuroscience | 49 | 12% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 34 | 8% |
| Computer Science | 28 | 7% |
| Other | 50 | 12% |
| Unknown | 69 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 48. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 November 2014.
All research outputs
#833,791
of 24,585,148 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#11,159
of 212,329 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,975
of 292,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#253
of 5,052 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,585,148 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 212,329 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 292,542 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,052 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.